Opinion
SC 19815
02-27-2018
A BETTER WAY WHOLESALE AUTOS, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF MOTOR VEHICLES
Drew S. Graham, assistant attorney general, with whom, on the brief, was George Jepsen, attorney general, for the appellant (defendant). Kenneth A. Votre, New Haven, with whom was Marissa Florio, for the appellee (plaintiff).
Drew S. Graham, assistant attorney general, with whom, on the brief, was George Jepsen, attorney general, for the appellant (defendant).
Kenneth A. Votre, New Haven, with whom was Marissa Florio, for the appellee (plaintiff).
Palmer, McDonald, Robinson, Mullins and Kahn, Js.
This case originally was scheduled to be argued before a panel of this court consisting of Justices Palmer, McDonald, Robinson, Mullins and Kahn. Although Justices Robinson and Kahn were not present when the case was argued before the court, they have read the briefs and appendices, and listened to a recording of the oral argument prior to participating in this decision.
PER CURIAM.The plaintiff, A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc., holds licenses from the Department of Motor Vehicles to deal in motor vehicles at two locations, but sought no such license for a third location at which it displays several hundred vehicles that may be purchased at one of the licensed locations. The defendant, the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, determined that the plaintiff had violated General Statutes §§ 14–52 and 14–54, respectively, by failing to obtain a license for that location and by failing to obtain a certificate of approval from local authorities for that location and to verify such approval with the defendant. The defendant imposed civil penalties in the amount of $5000 and ordered the plaintiff to cease such activity at that location unless and until it obtained the requisite license and certificate. In the plaintiff's administrative appeal, the trial court affirmed the defendant's decision with respect to the finding of a violation of the certificate requirement under § 14–54, but sustained the plaintiff's appeal with respect to the defendant's finding of a violation of the license requirement under § 14–52. The plaintiff appealed from the trial court's judgment. The defendant did not cross appeal. The Appellate Court reversed the trial court's judgment with respect to its finding of a violation of § 14–54 and remanded the case to that court with direction to sustain the plaintiff's appeal. A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc. v. Commissioner of Motor Vehicles , 167 Conn. App. 207, 219, 142 A.3d 1209 (2016).
We note that § 14–54 has been amended by the legislature since the events underlying the present case; see Public Acts 2016, No. 16–55, § 4; that amendment has no bearing on the merits of this appeal. In the interest of simplicity, we refer to the current revision of the statute.
Thereafter, we granted the defendant's request for certification to appeal, limited to the following questions: "Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that a car dealer's license is not conditioned upon local approval for each proposed location pursuant to ... [ § 14–54 ]?"; and "Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that there was a lack of substantial evidence in the record to support the Department of Motor Vehicles hearing officer's finding that the plaintiff violated [ § 14–54 ]?" A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc. v. Commissioner of Motor Vehicles , 323 Conn. 925, 150 A.3d 229 (2016).
We note that the first certified question imprecisely characterizes the Appellate Court's decision, as we construe that court to have concluded that § 14–54 does not prescribe a licensing requirement for each location, as that matter is addressed in other provisions. See A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc. v. Commissioner of Motor Vehicles , supra, 167 Conn. App. at 218–19 and n.8.
--------
After examining the entire record on appeal and considering the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, we have determined that the appeal in this case should be dismissed on the ground that certification was improvidently granted.
The appeal is dismissed.